<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2018 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'I think I found some of the cracks in this religion&apos;s story.',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_4.0/y.st./weblog/2018/11/28.jpg" alt="Cyclists go one way, pedestrians the other" class="framed-centred-image" width="649" height="480"/>
<section id="religion">
	<h2>Religion</h2>
	<p>
		I found another flaw in the logic of this religion.
		Supposedly, even in the worst of the three layers of heaven, there will be no crime.
		Yet everyone will retain their agency, or free will.
		To be clear, this worst layer of heaven is the one reserved for bad people.
		This religion believes there are three heavens.
		In the best, you have to follow Yahweh and Jesus to gain admittance.
		In the middle one, you have to reject Yahweh and Jesus, but still have been a good person in life.
		This third heaven is basically the hell where the bad people get put away, except that there&apos;s no major punishment for your crimes.
		You don&apos;t suffer, and still get to live decently well, you just don&apos;t get to live in as good a place as the Christians do.
		The missionaries say this is proof that Yahweh loves all his children.
		He doesn&apos;t create some hell and send some of them there.
		Even if you&apos;re bad, you&apos;re loved, or so they say.
		However, if you stick all the bad people in one place; or <strong>*any*</strong> bad people in one place, really, it only takes one; there&apos;s going to be crime.
		Much crime will be prevented by the fact that even in this heaven, all needs and desires are supposedly cared for.
		So for example, people that steal because they want stuff won&apos;t steal because they&apos;ll have everything they want.
		But for some people, what they want is to harm other people!
		That&apos;s all they get from it: the misery of others.
		You can&apos;t eliminate crime without either eliminating the bad people or eliminating free will.
	</p>
	<p>
		There&apos;s also the issue of the &quot;outer darkness&quot;.
		Apparently, one third of Yahweh&apos;s children chose to follow a plan that contradicted the plan of Jesus; a plan concocted by Lucifer.
		They chose this plan knowing full well that that plan would never come to fruition, and that if they chose Lucifer&apos;s plan, they&apos;d be exiled to the outer darkness.
		Not much is known here on earth about the outer darkness.
		Everyone on earth, according to this religion, chose Jesus&apos; plan, meaning than none of us will cast away to whatever this outer darkness place is.
		Therefore, it seems reasonable for Yahweh not to describe to us in this life what it is.
		It&apos;s not relevant to us.
		Though I do think that if this is real, we should be allowed to learn what it is in the next life.
		I mean, at that point, we&apos;ll have unlimited time.
		There won&apos;t be a reason <strong>*not*</strong> to learn about it.
		But anyway, this outer darkness place is supposed to be bad.
		Why would one third of Yahweh&apos;s people choose to go there?
		Are Yahweh and Jesus that bad, that so many people would rather suffer than follow them?
		And if so, do they really deserve to <strong>*be*</strong> followed?
		Did those of us that chose Jesus&apos; plan do so to avoid misery?
		Are we just the cowards that couldn&apos;t make the right choice if it meant eternal misery?
		And what&apos;s the deal with Lucifer?
		Why would he concoct such a plan, knowing it&apos;d result in his own exile?
		Of course, the missionaries couldn&apos;t answer this.
		Not much is known about the pre-earth times in this religion.
		It&apos;s all bare bones at that point in the history.
		Again, we &quot;don&apos;t need to know&quot;.
	</p>
	<p>
		Except, it&apos;s rather important for figuring out whether following Yahweh and Jesus is the right decision.
		Even if you can find it in your heart to believe in Yahweh, despite the lack of evidence, you need to figure out whether it&apos;s a good idea to follow him.
		In fact, that&apos;s how I dealt with the religion proposed by the last church that sent missionaries my way, before I discovered that they were actually a cult.
		I decided that the version of Yahweh proposed by their church, despite being the one that makes the most sense, does not deserve out praise, our admiration, our respect, or our warship.
		Even if rejecting him results in oblivion for us, it&apos;s the right decision to make.
	</p>
	<p>
		There&apos;s another thing that always eats at me when thinking about religions that say we existed before we came to earth.
		Why don&apos;t we remember it!?
		For some reason, we get our memories wiped, but why?
		In this variant of Christianity though, that oddity is itself a paradox.
		Free agency seems to be a huge deal to the Yahweh of this version of Christianity.
		Yet without proper knowledge, you can&apos;t make proper decisions.
		In order for choices to truly be your own, you need proper knowledge of what&apos;s going on.
	</p>
	<p>
		The missionaries say they have a total of five lessons, and they have an order in which they typically teach them, but that if I have questions, to let them know and they&apos;ll go out of order and jump to whatever lesson is relevant.
		They&apos;ll be back on Saturday, at 10:00.
		After thinking all day, I came up with what I want to ask them then.
		Where Adam and Eve human?
		If so, did they descend from non-human parents?
		If Adam and Eve truly were the first humans, they would have descended form something else.
		The fossil record has pretty good evidence that we evolved into our current state.
		We weren&apos;t just created as-is.
		I may not be able to prove that all religion is false, but I can certainly prove that specific religions don&apos;t make enough sense to be at all likely.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="health">
	<h2>Health</h2>
	<p>
		I arrived at the Planned Parenthood office, and as I&apos;d feared, I needed to make an appointment to get the information I need.
		I won&apos;t be able to find out about vasectomy permanence until 2018-12-13.
		My appointment is at 10:40.
		I&apos;m still shocked that I couldn&apos;t find what I was looking for online though.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="flat">
	<h2>Flat tire</h2>
	<p>
		When I left Planned Parenthood, I found my back tire was flat.
		Really!?
		I thought this was the third flat I&apos;ve gotten this month, but that doesn&apos;t take into account the second flat I got on one of those days, the one on the totalled bike.
		I&apos;ve had no less than four flats this month.
		This is really getting old.
	</p>
	<p>
		I had to walk the bike home.
		And when I went to remove the wheel, I found it won&apos;t come off!
		The front wheel comes off easier than on any bike I&apos;ve ever had.
		It was build for easy removal.
		However, the back wheel seems to be built the same as a standard bike.
		And the nuts seem to have corroded too badly and fused to the bolts.
		I think I might have even damaged my wrench trying to get the wheel off.
	</p>
	<p>
		So I removed the tire from the wheel without removing the wheel from the bike.
		That wouldn&apos;t let me change the inner tube, but it&apos;d maybe let me find the hole so I could figure out what caused this latest flat.
		&apos;Cause, y&apos;know, finding the cause of the broken inner tubes on the front wheel is probably why my front wheel hasn&apos;t gone flat a third time.
		However, I found the tube still had air in it!
		Not much, but it definitely had some.
		There was no hole.
		Someone had deliberately deflated my tire!
		My guess is that it was some person opposed to Planned Parenthood, attacking whatever random patients they happened to hit.
		<del>Odder still though was that they&apos;d deflated the tire so <strong>*well*</strong>.
		When I&apos;m <strong>*trying*</strong> to deflate my tires so I can get the tires off, I can&apos;t get the tube down to as little air as they did.</del>
		But the tube had so little air that the tire came off as easily as if the tire had really been punctured and lost every last part of its pressure.
	</p>
	<p>
		The rubber guard strip between the wheel and the tube was broken.
		I couldn&apos;t get it to stay in place, so I had to remove it.
		<del>It&apos;s likely I&apos;ll get a real flat soon due to the spoke ends poking into the inner tube.
		I need to figure out how to get this wheel off.</del>
	</p>
	<p>
		<ins>Actually, scratch that part about needing to find a way to get the wheel off.
		My mother leaves me random tools thinking I might have a use for them at some point.
		She has so many tools to the point of redundancy, and rather than just get rid of all the duplicates, she first has been leaving me with some of them so I don&apos;t have to buy my own.
		It&apos;s both practical, and very considerate.
		Anyway, I dug into a socket wrench set she left me most of.
		Between the fact that the part touching the nut had no moving parts (compared to the monkey wrench I was using) and the fact that the longer handle gave me more leverage, I got the thing off so I could install one of the rubber guard strips from one of my now-multitude of unused wheels I&apos;ve got lying around.
		Speaking of which, the tire came off rather easily, despite my having inflated it before.
		It must be this tire that comes off easily, and not that the attacker was better at deflating tires than I.
		Seriously though, I would need four to six hands to deflate tubes well enough to get other tires off easily.</ins>
	</p>
	<p>
		After leaving home to run errands, I found my tire slowly deflating once more.
		I can no longer say for sure that my tire was tampered with.
		However, the timing is still rather odd.
		I stopped at somewhere somewhat controversial, then my tire goes flat.
		And now it can only hold air for a short time.
		I have no hard evidence that anyone did anything though and that this isn&apos;t just random chance and more bad luck.
		I ended up having to return home early to swap the tube, then head back out to run the rest of my errands.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="drudgery">
	<h2>Drudgery</h2>
	<p>
		My discussion posts for the day:
	</p>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			It&apos;s not that I didn&apos;t read the instructions.
			Clearly, you didn&apos;t read what I wrote.
			As I said, I tried to read Niklaus Wirth&apos;s page on compiler construction, but that page was missing, and only presented me with a 404 error, as shown in my screenshot.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			Where did you get your link?
			It seems everyone had a different $a[URI] for the assigned reading material than the one I found in the learning guide.
			The fact that you all seem to have the <strong>*same*</strong> link as one another tells me you didn&apos;t just get another copy from a Web search or something.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			The biggest thing I keep saying isn&apos;t about the inner loop not repeating n times.
			It&apos;s that the inner loop doesn&apos;t repeat the same number of times for each iteration of the outer loop!
			It doesn&apos;t run n<sup>2</sup> times, (n-1)<sup>2</sup> times, (n-2)<sup>2</sup> times, or <strong>*any*</strong> square number of times.
			The inner loop runs zero times, then one time, then two times, et cetera, with each outer iteration resulting in a bigger number of inner iterations.
		</p>
		<p>
			And now, you&apos;re telling me the answer is O(n) because the lesser terms of n! can be dropped, resulting in an estimation of O(n) instead of O(n!).
			Assuming you&apos;re right and these terms should be dropped, it doesn&apos;t change the fact that in your posted solution, you didn&apos;t use O(n) or O(n!).
			You used O(n<sup>2</sup>).
			It&apos;s the O(n<sup>2</sup>) answer that I&apos;ve been debating against.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			It seems most students got O(n<sup>2</sup>) as their answer.
			I was sure that was the wrong answer, but with so many people going with that answer, maybe I&apos;m the one that&apos;s wrong.
			The funny thing is that my first thought was that the solution was O(n<sup>2</sup>), but then I noticed the inner loop not repeating right for that.
			Maybe the inner loop&apos;s details don&apos;t actually matter for some reason.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
</section>
<section id="Minetest">
	<h2>Minetest</h2>
	<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_3.0/minetest.net./weblog/2018/11/28.png" alt="Dusk approaches on my mountaintop" class="framed-centred-image" width="800" height="600"/>
	<p>
		I&apos;m thinking about having open paths instead of tunnel tubes.
		I need to do some more planning, but it&apos;d certainly work out very well in the overworld.
		Also, it&apos;d allow me to fit trees of all types, save for jungle trees, on any path I chose.
		The tallest non-jungle tree is the pine, which clocks in at up to fifteen metres.
		Add one metre for the dirt node it has to grow on, and you have the height of a map block; the height of my paths, including the ceilings and floors.
	</p>
</section>
END
);
